A fundamental study of the impact of pressure on the adsorption mechanism in reversed-phase liquid chromatography

⿢The impact of pressure on the retention mechanism in RPLC was detailed.⿢Adsorption isotherms were determined at pressures up to 1000bar at constant flow.⿢A two-site adsorption model was confirmed with adsorption energy distributions.⿢High energy sites, located deeper into the C18 layer, was most affected by pressure.⿢Loading capacity did not change with pressure. A fundamental investigation of the pressure effect on individual adsorption sites was undertaken based on adsorption energy distribution and adsorption isotherm measurements. For this purpose, we measured adsorption equilibrium data at pressures ranging from 100 to 1000bar at constant flow and over a wide concentration range for three low-molecular-weight solutes, antipyrine, sodium 2-naphthalenesulfonate, and benzyltriethylammonium chloride, on an Eternity C18 stationary phase. The adsorption energy distribution was bimodal for all solutes, remaining clearly so at all pressures. The bi-Langmuir model best described the adsorption in these systems and two types of adsorption sites were identified, one with a low and another with a high energy of interaction. Evidence exists that the low-energy interactions occur at the interface between the mobile and stationary phases and that the high-energy interactions occur nearer the silica surface, deeper in the C18 layer. The contribution of each type of adsorption site to the retention factor was calculated and the change in solute molar volume from the mobile to stationary phase during the adsorption process was estimated for each type of site. The change in solute molar volume was 2⿿4 times larger at the high-energy site, likely because of the greater loss of solute solvation layer when penetrating deeper into the C18 layer. The association equilibrium constant increased with increasing pressure while the saturation capacity of the low-energy site remained almost unchanged. The observed increase in saturation capacity for the high-energy site did not affect the column loading capacity, which was almost identical at 50- and 950-bar pressure drops over the column.